Trial reportJapanese journal of radiology2017
Ultra-low-dose CT coronary angiography using 128-slice dual source CT with low concentration contrast agent: initial experience.
Trial report in Japanese journal of radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultra-low dose one-step CT angiography for coronary, carotid and cerebral arteries using 128-slice dual-source CT: A feasibility study.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2019Article
- Micro-CT imaging as a method for comparing perfusion in graduated-height and single-height surgical staple lines.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo optimize and evaluate an ultra-low-dose (ULD) technique for CT coronary angiography (CTCA). MATERIALS AND
methodsEighty-two patients were randomly divided into two groups. ULD and routine CTCA were performed in groups A and B. Image quality, radiation dose and contrast agent were evaluated.
resultsThe effective dose (ED) was 0.20 ± 0.01 mSv for the ULD technique, a decrease of 87% (t = - 21.182, P < 0.001) compared with the control group. The total iodine content was 8.10 ± 0 g, a decrease of 62% (t = - 73.458, P < 0.001) compared with 21.10 ± 1.15 g for the control group. The assessment rates for both groups were the same (99.26 vs 99.64%, χ
conclusionUsing an ultra-low radiation dose and contrast agent technique, while maintaining an assessable image and improving the safety of the medical examination, was a feasible and reliable method for CTCA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.